tv Tonight From Washington CSPAN January 3, 2011 8:25pm-11:00pm EST
election. it is our job to grow the majority in every single state, every single courthouse and every single legislative district across the country. i think there are many programs that have really lifted up the grass roots. it is important that we have the fund-raising to see the jobs through. >> i really do not think we need to have a whole lot of balance in the sense that i think the primaries work and i think the voters work. there has always been a mistake when someone from above tries to decideho the nominee will be. i think th is a mistake. i think we should let the primary process work. when we put forth our best candidates we win. when we run the democrats will
lose. i think it is a very simple process and we should t the voters decide. ." >> -- >> the third question will be asked by a representative from e susan b. anthony st. my charge, i am happy to say, was to represent social issues here today, which is a unique opportunity because as families go, so goes the nation and so goes the civilization. that is in direct contradiction on the idea that we should have some sort of truce on social issues where we set them aside. i had the unique privilege of interviewing each of the candidates here along with green canyon -- frank
values and my values and sanctity of marriage as i consider a true sacraments. i also think it is wonderful to watch these kinds of values reaffirmed legislatively. when we won the majority and elected a republican governor, we were able to pass legislation that said that -- that marriage is between one man and one woman. >> marriage is both a religious and cultural institution that has existed for over 2000 years. i think it is a natural aspect of life. i think marriages between a man and a woman. the family unit is very important.
it is a religious and cultural institution that is worth protecting and were fighting for. >> i believe in traditional family. marriage is between a man and woman and i believe that because it has been a big part of my faith. i support the republican platform. >> what has been the republican party is the greatest failure over the last 10 years? >> not doing what we say we're going to do. not living up to the promises of our platform. what we saw in this last election certainly is what happens when you cut true conservatives on the ballot that speak the truth, that big to the
principles of our platform, and even in wisconsin, we can turn estate read by sticking to the principles of our party. people were defeated. a lot of us in this room are tired of going to the polls, holding our noses, and voting for republicans that did not uphold the basic principles of our platform. thanks to a lot of groups, including fatigue party, and our own republican party, and really getting back to the basics, we were able to save our party. like i said, the bigger issue is saving our country. we can save our country all -- we can save our party along the way. >> over the last decade, the republican party hasn't been in and out of power. -- has been in and out of power. here is people that we decide. we get into power and we lose
our way, the people have a way of writing that wrong. in the last 10 years, one of the big failures has been too much spending. our deficit is out of control. what we are passing along to our children is wrong. we have to rein in spending. we have to take a serious look. get our debts and are spending out of control. we have to do that authentically. otherwise, the people will cost us out. >> two years ago, we would walk around and talk to republican activists and apologize for the fact that we have lost our way. we no longer stood for the things that republicans stood for. we voted for higher taxes.
we stopped acting like republicans. we stopped talking about the issues. this is a center-right nation. when we act and talk and work republicans, we went. when we start voting like democrats, we lose. our biggest problem was that we stop acting like republicans. this time around, we got a second chance. it is a second chance and an opportunity for republicans to start acting like republicans. >> passing mccain of fine gold credit that was a mistake. -- find gold. that was a mistake. [applause] losing our way on spending.
when we lose our way on spending and taxes and the deficit, we lose elections. we've is voters at the ballot box. -- we lose voters at the ballot box. we need to stay on message. we have a second lifeline here and we better use it. [applause] >> all my colleagues have hit it just right. we walked away from a contract with america in 1994. we started defining ourselves outside of ourselves beyond who we were and what we believe. again, democrats like does not sell well in the public.
we stopped talking to people. we stopped trying to connect directly with people. we stopped expanding and leaching. we are the party of lincoln. part of our charges to go out and grab as many of those folks and make them a part of this wonderful experience that we have in the leaving of the value and individual liberties and free-market and those systems that have worked to build a nation. we stopped talking to our friends in the african-american community and the latino community and we stop engaging with individuals and we make assumptions, that is when we really start to lose. going forward, we will lose big if we lose sight of the fact that america is not the america of the 1950's and 1960's. it is a very different day. >> you described the rnc
chairman as the standard bearer. what would disqualify somebody from describing himself as a republican? specifically, what believes would a person have to espoused to say that person is no longer a republican? standard bearer must believe in the pillars of conservative many of uhold near and dear -- conservatism that many of us hold near and dear. conservative government. there is also a pillar of national events. i will tell you that after my ti as serving of united states ambassador, i have a great appreciation for our national security and how important it is. the third pillar would be that of national values, whether that
is the sanctity of life, marriage, amendment, what ever the social values are that we hold dr and year, those are the three things. if you cannot carry all three, i do not think you should be serving as chairman of the national republican committee. [applause] >> i would use ronald reagan that is someone is with us 80 percent of the time, they are probably republican. we laid out very clearly what our positions are, we articulate them in a very thoughtful way, and if the candidates, someone that will represent the party represented the platform 80% of the time or more, i would think there were republican. >> would fall back on what ronald reagan has told us.
-- i would fall back on what ronald reagan has told us. i think that really sums up what is in our party platform and what we as republicans stand for. >> i would agree with that but also recognize and that the country is much bigger than we think it is and runs a lot deeper with passions but recognize that everyone will have some problem with this platform and your opportuty and responsibility is to work with them and help them if they want to be active and assumed leadership. they will have to come to understand but we cannot be a party that sits back and
excludes. therefore i will not talk with you and only talk with you. that is not the republican party i joined a 17 years old. it will not be the republican party that i lead over the next two years. [applause] >> i think being the standard bearer for the republican party ha to take into account the apparel. and promote the conservative platform every time that he or she has an opportunity to do i because right now without anything barack obama and nancy pelosi did this past two years, normally it costs about 19 cents on every dollar made in america
to run the federal government. without anything it will cost 40 cents for every dollar made in america to run this country. if you are pro-abortion, pro stimulus, guess what? you might not be republican. >> question #6 >> about 15 probe-like democrats voted for abortion in health care will tell you life matters and elections and is a centerpiece of winning and losing elections. [applause]
in recent interviews with all of you each of you assume your right toife with the unborn child. given this commitment and the important coalition partner that pro-lifers are, pearl-like donors have seen a disconnect in are in see operations. specifically what steps would you take to integrate the issue into messaging coalition, technology and all financial and other assets that are at your disposal as chair? >> we worked very closely with right-to-life groups sitting down and identifying who the candidates were, potential candidates, what resours were
needed, what we could do legally and what we had to do independently. i think there has to be working relationship with all of the coalitions, particularly those that supports the sanctity of life. when we run for office i think it is very important for us to stand on principles. i think ideas have consequences and issues matter and when we run away from those issues we run away from opportunities in boaters. we should not hide where we stand on issues. i think we as a party have to integrate abortion and any other issu just like we do everything else. it is an important part of our platform and where most of the voters stand. and so i think that we can spend resources and talk about how we have to do that and do i effectively. >> i will do what i have done for the last 30 years and that is work hard to invest and
ild in state coalitions. it is how we win elections. it is working with e various pro-life coalitions to make sure we register voters, identify them and get them out to vote. i would also call for an 18- month state victory plan that has been submitted april 1. each of those states have a significant component dealing with coalition building an development. in addition, as i have always done, have an open-door policy to all coalitions to sit down and talk with individuals, work with them, and plan and strategize as we look to the 2012 elections. >> this is an area that we pay particular attention to, not with only respect to the life issue but a whole host of issues that revolve around a coalition effort.
expanding the reachf the party and voice of the party, making su the party is represented, and certainly that was no less true in our efforts with members of the pro-like community i met with several times publicly and privately on a host of issues from health care to statewide issues. on the state-wide front here is where the rubber meets the road. having build relationships at the state level where the battle for marriage and life questions are being engaged every single day, having that relationship does not play outf the federal level anymore. it is played out state-by-state and the party has an opportunity to engage with the ate legislative leaders as we have over the past two years to help with the important issues. >> i believe it is something
that can be very effective. it is a great chapter across the country. i do notelieve we either have none or close to none or would guest to venture no state legislators or federal office holders in the state of wisconsin that are not pro- life. this is paramount to our platform as republicans. and i think we have a responsibility as republicans to the right-to-life issue. this is a coalition that is vitally important to our movement, to the conservative movement, and i would do everything i could to continue to promote the coalition and be proud about the fact that we are pro-life. we do belve life begins at conception. [applause]
>> thank you for the great question and the work to do to promote with pro-light women candidates out there. it is unfortunate if anybody at the republican party level would be discouraging candidates from holding their pro-life values and views out front. we certainly doot do that in missouri. and i think it is important that the right to life coalition and all coitions have a seat at the table to discuss everything, all o the things that go io the messaging to win a good, healthy election. we do this in misery whether it is direct mail pieces, regional radio. -- we do this in missouri whether it is direct mail pieces, regional radio.
the right-to-life organizations out there should always have a seat at the table, wheer it is platforms, canada retirement or winning elections. over the last 50 years there has been a series of waves of immigration of activists voters into the republican party. in the 1960 topos the goldwater voters -- in the 1960's with the goldwater voters in the most recent years the tea party. how do you keep the republican party open to the next waves of who can be added to the party strength and what groups to use seat critically available that we ought to be pursuing? maria cino. >> i will try to theec that
multifaceted question. first of all again, my experience has been building strong coalitions, and i would first and foremost welcome open door and talk with all of the various groups and communicating with and working with them. i think the second thing is to make sure that our state parties are aware of the various coalitions and various groups and working with these folks as we look down the road in building from the bottom up our party to elect republicans in 2012. >> i have spent my entire political life in the trenches in this town where i grew up as an elected official and it has always been about the grass roots, the bottom-up, reaching up in getting out of the comfort zone as republicans. we do get a little comfortable
with ourselves and we do become comfortable to the exclusion of others, and i think we have an enormous opportunity with the surge we have seen in the tea party activism to really open up the doors of this party and let a new light shine in on it, some fresh faces and voices that do not look and sound like us, that do not have the same walk or background experience, but bring a wealth of new ideas to the table. we tried to do that through the coalition department at the rnc, with the idea of making a grass- roots oriented going forward. adding to that flavor every single day as the party expands into the 2012 cycle. >> we need to play well in the sandbox with tea party movement,
the conservative movement. i think we have done that, certainly in wisconsin we have done that. we had a lot of success with that. we are not in competition with the basement, we are part of it. our actions speak louder than words. we have to get out on the streets and talk to people. we were one of the only states in the entire country that set up a hispanic headquarters full- time, hired a hispanic director to get the job done and get out in the community and build coalitions. we brought on the african- american council to the republican party of wisconsin. our actions have to speak louder than words. we can make it happen but we have to work together and ask to be a priority and an important priority of the heart.
when it is a priority of the heart, good things will result. you for the question. it is the job to bring people together towards the common purpose, both newnd existing coalitions, all with the purpose of winning elections. and that is what we are all here to do. i love people, i love to communicate and bring people to the table to talk about ideas, listen to what they have to say. this conservative movement that is out here over the last two years is fantastic. let us not forget, the two- party patriot and grass-roots movement is why we have such victories in 2010. [applause] all of these groups will have a seat at the table when i am chairman of thenc. it is important recognize the
importance, to listen to what they have to say to make them a part of a winning coalition going forward. >> as someone who came up in 1987 i was part of the jack kemp resolution that wanted to bring the party back. this time people were really frustrated with the democratic and republican parties. when we lose our ith with the voters, they have a way of figuring out a different vehicle. i think we do have to reset out to the african- out american community, hispanic community. we cannot just come in 60 days before an election and say we care aut the african-american vote or show up 30 days before the election and show up and an event and for pretend like we
care. in michigan we were very lucky this year. we did not have to go out and look for choking candidates. we were able to integrate people into the party and make a difference. >> the next question begins with chairman steele. there has been the get out the vote campaign. it has gone up to week before the election. in 2010 that program was discontinued. do you think that was a wis choice? if you are reelected would you revisit that decision? >> it was a wise choice. it was not discontinued it was not put out the way people were to seeing it. i have heard enough state chairmans saying i do not need strangers coming into my backyard the last week of the election telling me how to run
an election when they have no idea what it is about. we decided to turn rnc into a victory center. in 100 funds availab to anyone on capitol hill that wanted t come and make phone calls. the money that would have been spent on an airplane or hotel for a week for capitol hill staffers to go to michigan, wisconsin, to go to new jersey or anyplace else in e country to work was a waste of resources. what we did is we package the dollars and gave the money directly to the states. we believe very firmly in the state-focused, state-oriented program. in every state party gave me a plan in early 2010, actually 2009, that laid out with the strategy will be. we funded that strategy directly. it was developed by each state. we funded those directly as opposed to sending staffers to
different parts of the country. we opened up rnc and they could come across the street at no cost to anyone have a sandwich and make phone calls. >> i do not care to revisit the past, but in the future i think we need a fully funded tv effort across the board, wherever that may be. it comes down to money and resources. you have all heard their estimates. everyo here will agree that the number one challenge to the rnc moving forward is raising about $400 million over the next two years, whh basically means the next chairman will be sitting in office for five or six hours a day running through major donor of this, setting up meetings, a national finance network and team in order to fully fund all of the programs. we cannot go into 2012 having to
make decisions between which got effort we fund in which one we do not. i think everyone would agree withhat. that is going to be the big challenge, whether it be technology, gotv, it will all come down to money. that is why money will be the number one priority for the next chairman of the rnc. >> good turnout programs are nothing but words on paper if there is no money and resources behind them. we fell down at the national committee in this last election cycle in that regard. we have got to fully fund our state victory programs. it is important for the entire ticket and will be very important this next election cycle of 2012 when the democrats are much more motivated and turnout will be at a peak level. 72 hours does not cut it
anymore. we have 32 states that have early voting. 72 hours we need to push at the end in terms of turnout, but that turnout effort, those efforts much start much earlier. most of all they have to be fully funded. >> i agree. i think one of the most important things we do as the republican party is coronate and fund the get-out-the-vote effort. the 72 our program is more like a 30-day program, sometimes 45- day program depended on what state you come from. the challenge this time around is we do not have enough resources. we have congressional senate races across the country. we will have a lot of challenges with respect to funding, and i think the most important thing we can do is we will raise the money necessary to fund the programs.
to me, that is the most critical program we have come at the most critical thing we can do and every state party has been struggling to get that done. >> well, i am little partial to the 72-hour program because it was under my leadership that we implemented, funded, and put out 6000 volunteers in 2004 for the 72-hour program a 1000 attorneys. while i believe it is very important to assess our financial ability to do this, i would make sure it's the 72-hour program, which should be a 96- hour program, is implemented again as part ofhe state party planning. . .
>> may i please address? you are right, we did not have a lot of volunteers of washington. we had two hundred thousand volunteers around the country who've made 45 million voter contacts. we did not have the 72-hour voter program. we had a 12-month voter program. our victory operation began in january 2010. it culminated with 62 house seats. two thousand volunteers were on the ground, knocking on doors and making signs.
we did fully funded. you know how we did it? we did it differently. your state may have done x amount of dollars, but, because we were playing in all states, there was not enough to go around. >> finally, -- find me a state that did not have a winning election. i think we won in all 50 states this year, and that is the goal, winning. [applause] >> next question, beginning with reince priebus, is do you consider combating voter fraud at a high priority? what plans to you have to combat it? >> that is a good question for me, bause i was chairman when we sued our government accountability board in the state of wisconsin over our non- compliance with an 8-year-old law. we are one of the few states in the entire country, wisconsin,
where you can actually vote on election day without registering, and you can also vote without any picture identification at all. our challenge is in states like wisconsin -- challenges in states like wisconsin are astronomical. we have a board appointed by a democratic governor, all former judges appnted by the same goveor. we have no statewide registration list that is remotely accurate still as of this day. as a national party chairmen, i would use theesources to assist, obviously, the state parties and their actions against their states. i think we need to win these battles and the courts. we need to win more races in the legislatures of that we can pass photo id in all states and make sure that we either have photo id, real id, or some method of protecting our constitutional
right to vote in this country. i could get past the top priority of the next chairman. -- i think it has to be a top priority of the next chairman. >> voter fraud is a real issue, and it is important that the state party and the national party provides the resources and the legal basis and resources to stop of voter fraud out there and initiate what we will call ballot integrity programs across the country. poll watchers are important to have out there to keep a vigilant but we had an army of those in many precincts in the state of missouri. provisional ballot is the key way we have to play, to make sure that the rules and the integrity of that are kept. we have to have teams of lawyers that we can call at a moment's notice to go down, whether it is closing a poll, checking on the ballots and voting that is going on at any particular voting place. all that goes into it.
technology has given us the great ability to have voting free and fair and easy. we want people to vote and we wanted to be easy for them to vote but hard for them to cheat. it is important we get out there and find these programs at the state and national level -- and fund these programs at the state and national level. >> michigan, for example, is a blue state that can go read under the right circumstances. one of the challenges is a voter fraud in urban areas. we found tens of thousands of abntee ballots that were signed and never fell out and were apparently r sale. luckily, we were able to hold those ballots -- we call in the state attorney's office. we were able to set up our program that worked. we had to be filed lawsuits were all you had to do is fill in the blanks -- had prefiled lawsuits were all you had to do is fill
in the blanks. some of the states involved in these races now and challenges now can be assured with everybody else. it is a best practices aspec that i think we can make a difference, especially with the states that don't have the resources and some of the things that the swing states have been involved in. >> i, too, have been involved in integrity and ballot security programs, and i think they are extremely important. i would remind you, 1981 -- some of you probably weren't born -- in the state of new jersey 1 the govern. in this state in 2000, whe one -- we won. ballot integrity programs are very important. starting with training in this case and then training and districts, local organizations. additionally, making sure we have attorneys like we did in
2004. we sent out 1000 attorneys from the area to various states around the count and provided resources necessary to go to court when you have to go to court to fight these cases. >> the issue of public integrity is clearly one that is onhe foremind of everyone in terms of whether or not ballots are secure and whether or not people can trust that the process is going to work. certainly in the past year, going back to the 2009 election cycle, we made a very concerted effort to coordinate much more closely with state partisan than we have in the past, whether it was in wisconsin, -- coordinate much more closely with state parties then we have on the past, whether it was in wisconsin or with gov. christie's effort, knowing that there are issues to be concerned of. coming from the states like maryland, we know what it's like to lose a governor's race because of cheating the reality for us at the national level have to be one of direct coordination, not dictation, at
the state party' they know what the feel and the environment is on the ground. having them come to us and say, "this is what we need," and being able to provide that is critical. they know first and foremost with the realities are. lastly, coordinati with lawyers and individuals who can be a part of that team, particularly when you get into the cycle at the end, as we recently did with a recount, to make sure that the repetitions are there. >> i number of you have made the point that the incoming congress was elected on hopes that it would address spending above all other matters. how confident are you that the leadership will in fact do that? what specific government programs do you think will be dramatically pared down or cut by the incoming republican congress? >> i think we saw a very good at beginning with our republican leadership that came in during the lame-duck session and took a
real hard stand agait earmarks. we saw the omnibus bill fall under the weight of its own weight. it is important, very much, that the spending and debt be drawn in. as i said a little bit earlier, everything needs to be on the table. we need to the it department cuts. the gro in cover -- therowth in government -- if you look at the stimulus package, really all that it was pro-government. it did not grow jobs. we're still close to 10% unemployment. it is important that we look at programs to cut. it is important that we look at some of the mandates that are out there that need to be on -- entitlements that need to be looked at. i think that this congress is going to take itery, very seriously, and they don't, the people wilhave a say in 2012. >> look, i think we have a lot of challenges. i am very optimistic with
respect to republicans we have elected in congress. the people came here with a mandate, they understand why they are here. those who listen to the people of arica and act on what their elected to will be effective and be reelected whether it is the aarp and se as or across-the- board cuts that are probably -- whether it is tarp and stimulus or cross-the-board cuts that are probably necessary, we cannot have crony capitalism. otherwise, we will turn into a european-style country bread we -- otherwise, we will turn into a european-style country. from my perspective, there is a cross-the-board cuts that have to be done i hope we never get into a situation again will we even consider tarp or stimulus. >> you know, i think that if we have learned anything from the
2010 elections, our friends in the tea party, it is that we have to be focused and stick to our principles of cutting taxes and cutting spending. i think we have gotten off to a great start with our new republican leadership with regards to doing away with earmarks. i think that speaker boehner today gestured 5% -- he would cut his personal congressional budget by 5% and the rest of congress' by 5%. but that is not enough to going to look at bills -- but that is not enough. looking abills that have amendments, bridges to nowhere. as the former deputy secretary of transportation, i can tell you that $55 billion -- they always want more. but from the bush administration, we helthe line and make sure we did not go out in our spending i think that is
what the republican leadership is going to do and we have to hold their feet to the fire to make sure that they do exactly what they were elected to do. >> i think we have to be clear about the role we have in this position as chairman and. as i was reminded several times by the members of the senate and house, you don't do policy. the reality of it is, we don't in this perch. we do politics. but our responsibility is, and what mine has bee over the last two years, is to take the leadership what i hear from you, what i hear from the grassroots. if you get to sit there and decide what the policy is -- you can have an impact on appellate ticks of the policy by being an advocate on -- you can have an impact on the politics of a policy by being an advocate for the tea partyers or gndmother
getting involved for the first time. being an aocate for the up- and-comers just starting on their own. having a conversation about translating the tax and other policies coming off of the hills so that people understand in the grass roo what is going on and that people on the hill understand what the grass roots want to it the end of the day, you don't get to dictate the terms to the speaker of the house, you don't get to dictate the terms to the minority leader of the senate. you have to carry the message to them and bring that message from them, and if you get it wrong, you'll be reminded that you don't to policy. [applause] >> one of the things i talk about a lots chairman of the wionsin party is that -- wow. [laughter] while we lick the envelopes and
put up signs and raise the money, and guess what? we expect a ctain result. i think the party does have a role in enforcing with that expectation is with our elected officials. if the results aren't there, we do have power to dictate results or least help dictate results, and that is called go to the ballot box, it is called primary. you know, the voters gave us a lease. they did not give us the keys. we have an opportunity to put the train back on the rails. how many people who are republican you're actually believe that the idea of america is at stake in 2012? who believes that? well, we started off the right away in eliminating earmarks. our people get it. but we need to go further. one of my good friends, paul ryan -- i was his congressional chrmen for years -- he gets
it. he knows we need to elevate the debate because we need to save our country. >> the next question is a video question, and hence the screen, from the college republicans communications director. >> nearly 20% of the total voting population w between 18 and 29 years old. unfortunately for republicans, at a faction devoted 66% for president obama. however, that same demographics said they only have a 44% approval of president obama and the outgoing democratic congress. this gives the republican party a golden opportunity to recruit and engagnew members of the party. as the newly elected chairman or chairwoman, would you do to encourage young republicans with messing so that we can engage them into the process? >> first of all, our message
ought to bvery clear and straightforward. i think conservative values work. i think they work on college campuses and would be very suessful. we have to understand technology kids are using these days. it is not enough to say, "i use twitter" or "i use facebook." you have to be part of it and lit it. when y look at the hundreds of thousands -- hundreds of millions of people who are on facebook, for example, and 70% of people get some information online -- all the young voters are going to hear and what they want to be a part of an where they get that information is online sources. we have to be very activ with college republicans and young republicans. we obviously have the legal restrictions as to what we can and cannot do. this is an area that is not only the future of the party, this is the party today. this is where w wilgrow and succeed. >> in 2010, we were very fortunate to elect the next generation of young republican
leaders. if you look at marco rubio, jamie herrera, just an amicable, it is an extraordinary group of individuals. i would look at those young new leers to help us appeal to young voters. it would be so extremely important. i want to make surehat our state victory plans have a significant component dealing with young voters. going back to college campuses and registering voters and making sure that we get young voters as volunteers. additionally, i would use our young leaders to help us to recruit candidates. we need to have a bench, and that is not a better served than by young republicans. finally, i touched on it a little bit -- we need to be able to communicate with our young voters. we need to be able to do social networking. we need look beyond what the next generation of the communication is with our young folks. >> we made a significant investment at the rnc my first
year just on that front to make what we had to say relevant through new vehicles and technologies. we don't have a webpage, we have a web platform that can be used in different ways, as saul noted, to really make use of twitter and blogging and the like. that is the first step of many that we have to take to engage this new generation of young voters who are coming into their own. they are getting elected. i have encouraged over the past two years our college republicans, and i would encourage them now, to run for national committeeman and committeewoman fm your state party, chairman of your state party, run for local office, run and be involved in thisrocess. get your fingers at the table and helped shape the direction of the party. the feature is not tomorrow, as saul noted. it is right now. at every effort we have made at the rnc is towards in beijing,
from the bu -- t owards engaging, from tehe bus tour to engaging young voters to have a seat at the table. all of us are going to retire, probably sooner than later for some. we need to make certain that the next generation is prepared and ready to step up. >> i think it is a couple of things, i think that is right. you have the congregation people, bring them in the full. -- you have to engage young people. you have to bring them into the cold. we have to promote the new generation of the republican party. someone mentioned marco rubio, one of my law school classmates, and paul ryan, aaron shock. we have a gop rising stars coming out of our ears right now. but at the end of the day, keep in mind that one of the biggest
used movements and the country was on a break a -- biggest youth movements in the country was ronald reagan. teenage republicans -- that is how i became involved, as a teenager, and then as the college republican president, and working my way up the ranks. the way i got involved was one senior guide invited me to lick envelopes. that is how it all started. it was not a young person who got involved. it was a grown-up. here i am debating my potential candidacy here for rnc chairman. >> the youth o this nation and party are not the future of the party, they are the heart of the party. i was reminded of that when i was having a lunch at a senate campaign this last cycle.
the use of the party run our party. they are the workers goingoor- to-door and making calls, the staffers working tl us hours for nothing but it beats the. i am 48 years old. i was old in this last election cycle. i have great ideas to use new chnology and have a conversation with the young people where theyive. it is important we begin to institute a virtual precinct. you all have a facebook page, and work, a group of people who follow you, that are a part of your world. you ought to be at the getting to them, just like we did the old geographic -- you ought to be advocating to them, just like we did the old a geographic precincts. the virtual precinct is a way to make them a real part of this next election cycle. >> all right, it is time for our lightning round. i want to remind our viewers that we're still open to
comments and questions from twitter. the address is #rncdebate. >> the late and unlamented governor of florida, charlie christie -- >> crist. [laughter] >> florida, e one down south -- raised a great deal of money running as a republican, receiving money from republican committees and institutions, then decided to run as an independent per had a number of people who ran as republicans raising money from republicans would endorse other candidates if they did not win the primary. perhaps as a result, the standing committee on rules for the rnc passed a resolution,he party unity pledge, saying that anybody who receives money from republicans running as
republicans could assign that pledge and be responsible for returning the money if they decided to run on another party line or endorse a different candidate. the short answer to the law question is and do you suprt the the adoption of this unity pledge into the rules of the republican party? >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> that was indeed a lightning round. [laughter] i am impressed. do you believe that republican primaries ought to be limited to republicans, or should it be open up to anyone? >> limited to republicans. .> republicans brough >> republican primaries ought to be for republicans.
>> aside from president reagan, who is your political hero? [laughter] [applause] last year we got caught -- >> this is a request in. > -- a trick question. >> after reagan, who would you cite as a hero? >> abraham lincoln. >> i will go back to myta. general john ashcroft is my hero. he brought me into the party. he is a man of character and integrity. is is a lightning round, i'm sorry. >> freedomworks. >> margaret thatcher. >> frederick douglass. >> where do you get your news? [laughter]
>> the daily caller. [laughter] no, mostly from the internet. the final three pages in the first section of "the wall street journal," with politics, gop. >> i get many of the internet. i read everything from blogs to newspapers. >> i am probably a religious reader of the drug repor -- drudge report, hotline, politico, all the other information online. >> so much for lightning round. >> i get my news online also --
"wall street journal," "national review." >> i am an old-fashioned guy. i start my morning with a hard copy of "the washington post," and then go on line to get the real news. [laughter] >> tube support completely -- do you support completely defunding planned parenthood? >> absolutely. >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> starting with mr. anuzis, names of the mr. obama has done that you agree with --. name something mr. obama has done that you agree with. [laughter] >> i think this effort to called republicans prosecute the war -- to help republicans prosecute the war.
>> i agree with that, if he opposes a end of the bargain. -- he upholds his end of the bargain. >> he has done a good job of reaching out with new technology. >> how many guns you own? >> none. >> none. >> five. >> we jt got a new gun safe for christmas, and we have about 16 in there. my son is at west point. [applause] >> i am very inadequate, at four. >> ken sarah palin win a general election? -- can sarah palin when a general election? >> yes. >> yes.
>> yes, absolutely. >> yes. >> forever. >>reagan diaries." >> hmm, favorite bar? probably my kitchen table. >> favorite book. >> all, i thought they said favored by -- favorite bar. [laughter] >> that was deeply revealing. >> "reagan diaries." n i like a george w. bush's book, how about that? >> "to kill a mockingbird." >> "war and peace." the best of times and the worst
of times. [laughter] >> thank you all. that was the lightningest lightning round i've ever seen. we're going to go to follow the ups that we've received, and we really just received them. we have not had time to dr. them. these are literally just things we just got. this is from drew walker. did you lobby for obamacare? if so, why? >> no one wants to go to a government-run health care syem. i think we have seen what has happened at overseas, particularly in europe. i am proud to say that this last year i work with our republican meers in the house and in the senate, i worked against death panels and rioning, i word to reform malpractice suits. i worked to make to the
innovation was rewarded, and i worked to increase -- to make sure innovation was reported and i worked to increase intellectual property protection. >> thank you. >> no, i did not. i worked for the republican principles i just mentioned. >> ann wagner, how would you solve the rnc's current budget crisis prior to the victory 2011 program? >> it is about fundraising. we have to go out and restore our major donor programs. i have put them forward on annwagner.com. it talk about top tier donor is all the way down to the liver donors. you must note -- around the country -- to the low donors. you must go around the country.
you have to cover the running of the rnc, and most importantly, you have to fund state party programs. >> chairman steele, at times you have defended her record by suggesting that your critics -- defending your record by suggesting that your critics were acting against african- americans out of bias. >> no, that is not true. you may have heard the media reporting it that way. my record speaks for itself. we wind. -- we won. the fact that we are here right now celebrating that win says a lot about the record. [applause] >> my tweeted question is for
the man was glad this is not a write-incampaign. third-party groups helped win elections in 2010. why do we need an rnc at all? >> i think we can drive the ground game pretty darned well. we have a vast national network of people committed to putting the party and its principles upon their shoulders to make that happen. that does not mean that we should not play well in the sand box with everyone, because we all need to have good relationships, good collisions, wisconsin right to life --, uld coalitions, wisconsin right to life, but at the end of the day, the republican party is one of the two major political parties in the country and we need to be strong, well funded, and on the ground with
everybody moving forward into 2012. we have to continue our fight. >> saul anuzis, you are from michigan. how would you target predominantly blue states like michigan, the northeast, the west coast? >> will we have to do is reach out to the traditional voter that we have lost. i grew up in detroit, and we were reagan democrats. we thought we were democrats until we started reading. we have a tremendous opportunity, if you go and look at where the american voter is today, it is us. god, guns, and guts republicans, people who believe in the traditional values that make up probably 70% of our society. as long as we appeal to them on conservative values, we can win. it is always interesting and i think a mistake when we think we have to change. my clock was up, sorry. >> thank you all very much. i think we are ready for closing statements. we're going to go from this
di --from mr. priebus and back down this way. >> this is about choices. life is about choices. god gives us different talents and given a gift. everybody up here is a good person. i'm not running against anybody paid i'm running -- i'm not running against anybody. i'm running for rnc chairman at time of different needs. chaman to his would-be workers, who is going to put on a great convention, at tackle redistricting. i have demonstrated that i can do all that as chairman in wisconsin. as i've said many times, we learned how to work with the conservative movement. i'm asking everybody in this room for your support. i know not everybody can vote for me, but if god bless me to
be chairman of this party, all of us are going to have to work as a team to get it done to sa our country and in turn to save our party and win in 2012 and take back the white house. thank you, and god bless you. [applause] >> i would like to thank our sponsors for this opportunity. i want to thank the members, and the members of the republican national committee, the 168 members, thank you for allowing me to serve as chairman for the past two years. thank you for allowing me to take risks for you. thank you for interesting me to break new ground for you. thank you for the opportunity to empower our state parties on like they have ever been before. if you want more of that, if you want to do more of that, if you want to be strong, independent, and engaged state party, you
don't need a top-down rnc, because i am not a top-down person, as you know. you need more of the same from the bottom up. as the national chairmen, that is m commitment, not my promise, because of the record we have laid out for you speaks for itself. we can do more, and we will do it better. thank you. [applause] >> thanks again to our coasts and to the -- our hosts and to the rnc members here today. i believe i am uniquely qualified because i have successfully done this job before. i turned around a national campaign committee that was in debt and won a majority in the u.s. house of representatives. twice i was personally responsible for planning and funding inmplementing 50-state victory programs around the country, in 2000 and 2004.
my past experience has given me the fouation necessary to build a party in a presidential election. on january 15, i walked into the rnc with no on-the-job training as ever, because i have already done this job. vote and for your the trust to take over the national committee. thank you very much. [applause] >> well, look, i am a movement conservative who believe that ideas have consequences and principles matter. but i al believe i am uniquely qualified to te this position. i think i have the administrative skills, having run operation with over 400 employees and $60 million budget. i have the political skills, havingorked on hundreds of campaign from the presidential down to the county level. i have the fund-raising skills necessary to raise millions of dollars in some of the toughest times, and believe me, retiring the debt is going to be some of the toughest times. and i am one of the most
technologically advanced members, who knows how to communicate with millions of people tay who get most of their information over the internet. most importantly, i am a member who believes we ought to be a member-based organization and all members across the country who want to be involved in this process. every single person on the national committee got there the hard way. they worked their way up because they offered something t their states and they have talents they want to share with us. we have to put together a member-based committee that will help us win in 2012. thank you very much. [applause] >> i am the daughter of small business owners who has been working since i was 11 years old. i've been living my traditional conservative republican values all my life of limited government and free enterprise and personal responsibility. i began my political career as a grass-roots activists and became a leader, a leader who knows how to connect with people and articulate a message, how to win elections and put winning teams and coalitions togetr to do
that. my experience is rooted in the heartland of america. i am at a suburban mother of three. who has been married for 24 years, and whose american dream is all about serving your community and our country -- her community and her country in the way of serving republican principles and ideals and candidates. i think we have an opportunity to change course on january 14 at the republican national committee. i'm asking for the supportfor the vote, and for the help of everyone on the republican national committee and all of you out there so that we can win 2012 and that i can be elected the next chairman of the republican national committee. our freedoms, our families and our public is worth the fight. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentleman, candidates, ann wagner saul anuzis, michael steele, maria
cino, reince priebus, the election is to number 14. thanks to -- the election is january 14. thanks to tucker and marjorie. see you in four years. >> california gov. jerry brown was sworn into office today. that is next on c-span. after that, a forum on issues facing president obama and the new congress.
>> for these children, our children, and for all of america's children, the house will come to order. >> with the start of the new congress this wednesday, look back at the opening of past sessions online at the c-span video library with every c-span program since 1987, more than 160,000 hours. they're all searchable and all free. your washington, your way. >> on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," we will pallone of thek alon republican-held house. later, david ladera of standard and poor's index committee will give an update -- david pulitzeblitzer of standard and's
index committee will give us an update. >> coming up next, jerry brown is inaugurated as the 39th governor of california. he is returning for a third term as governor, a position that was also held by his father. he was sworn in by the chief justice of the california supreme court at the memorial auditorium in sacramento. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> we would like to introduce you the next first lady of the state of california. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much.
i cannot see any of you. but i sense you. [applause] thank you all for that warm welcome and thank you all for being here. i really cannot see any of you because this light is a my eye, but i can hear you out there. thank you for coming. i appreciate the governor schwarzenegger and gov. davis for being here and they're lovely wife, maria and sharon, two wonderful first ladies of california. i hope that i can even begin to achieve what they have. [applause] i also want to thank senator feinstein and speaker pelosi. i am told that they are both
here. thank you so much. [applause] i also want to thank my family, some of whom came from pretty far away. we really appreciate all of you came. and all the other californians and supporters here, thank you for coming to this special day. i really appreciate having you here. also, i wanted to give one middle last thank you to the wonderful students of the oakland school for the arts and the cadets from the oakland military institute. [applause] this is a very special day for my husband. as you all know, he has been here before. so this is kind of a coming back. last evening, he attended a party with many of his old
workers and supporters and it is just a very emotional day and we're very excited to be here. without me talking in the longer, i would like to introduce my husband, the next governor of the state of california, edmund gerald brown jr. [applause] [cheers and applause] >> thank you. thank you. nice to see you. >> and now, ladies and gentlemen, to administer the oath of office, please welcome the newly sworn in 28 chief justice of the california
supreme court, the most honorable tonic until suck awas. >> are you ready? >> yes. please raise your right hand. >> i, jerry brown, do solemnly swear that i will support and defend the constitution of the united states and the constitution of the state of california against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and i will bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution of the united states and the
constitution of the state of california. that i take this obligation freely without any mental --ervation is [laughter] really, no mental reservations. [cheers and applause] or purpose of evasion and will faithfully discharge the duties upon which i am about to enter. >> congratulations. >> thank you very much.
[cheers and applause] >> this is the first time i did one of these inauguration's with my hand on a bible. we use this for the wedding. we used before the inauguration. i think it is going to stick. [laughter] madam chief justice, gov. and mrs. davis, gov. and mrs. schwarzenegger, constitutional officers, distinguished guests, fellow californians, thank you for joining me today. gov. schwarzenegger, thank you also for your courtesies and help in the transition and for your tireless effort to keep
california the great exception that it is. [applause] this is a special moment as executive power passes from one governor to another, determined solely by majority vote. it is a separate and special ritual that affirms that the people are in charge and that elected officials are given only limited time in which to perform their appointed tasks. for me, this day is also special because i get to follow in my father's footsteps once again. [applause] in 36 years after my first inauguration as governor, i even follow in my own. [laughter] in 1975, it was the ending of the vietnam war and a recession
caused by the middle east oil embargo. now, as we gather in this restored memorial auditorium dedicated to those who died in world war i, it is our soldiers fighting in iraq and afghanistan, our economy caught in the undertow of a deep and prolonged recession. with so many people out of work and so many families losing their homes to foreclosure, but it is not surprising that voters tell us they are worried. and believe that california is on the wrong track. yet, in the face of huge budget deficits year after year, the worst credit rating in the 50 states, our two political parties cannot come close to agreeing on what the right path forward is. they will remain in their respective comfort zones, rehearsing and rehashing old political positions. perhaps that is the reason that the public holds the state
government in such low esteem. that is a profound problem, not just with those of us who are elected, but for our whole system of self-government. without the trust of the people, politics the generates into your -- into mere spectacle and democracy declines, leaving demagoguery and cynicism to fill the void. the year ahead will demand courage and sacrifice. the budget i propose will assume that each of us who were elected to do the people's business will rise above etiology and -- above ideology and partisan interest for the good of california. [applause] there is no other way forward. in this crisis, we simply have to learn to work together. as californians first, members of a political party second. [applause]
in seeking the office of governor, i set out to be guided by three principles. first, speak the truth. no more smoking mirrors on the budget, no empty promises. [applause] second, no new taxes unless the people vote for them. [applause] third, return as much as possible the decisions and authorities to cities, counties, and schools close to the people. [applause] with your help, that is exactly what i intend to do. the budget by present next week will be painful, but it will be in honest budget. spending will be matched with available tax revenues and specific proposals will be offered to realign key functions that are currently spread between state and local
government in ways that are complex, confusing, and inefficient. my goal is to achieve greater accountability and reduced the historic shifting of responsibility back and forth from one level of government to another. the plan represents my best understanding of our real dilemmas and possibilities. it is a tough budget for tough times. when dealing with a budget gap in the tens of billions, i must point out that it is far more than waste and inefficiency that we have to take out. yes, government wastes money. i will be doing a lot about that starting this week. but government also pays for things that most people want and that are approved only after lawmakers debate their merit and they are voted into law.
tax incentives, environmental protection, fire fighting, and much else -- the choices have to be made. . at this stage in my life, i have not come here to embrace delay and the nile. -- delay and denial. [applause] on reflecting upon our difficulties, my thoughts turn to those who proceeding in it -- those who preceded me. a father took the oath of office as governor 52 years ago. his mother, ida, born on a ranch in 1878 and her father left missouri in 1852 and traveled across the plains to sacramento. i tried to imagine the
difficulties my great- grandfather confronted as he left germany and came to america and then across the plains and over the sierras into california. let me read from the diaries that he kept during his long trek westward. "on the 26 of june, we came to the first sandy desert. it was 41 miles. we went there at night and rode 19 hours in it. on the 26 of july, we came to the second large plane, also 40 miles long. here we lost seven oxen which died of thirst. thousands of cows, horses, and mules were lying about dead. the discarded wagons by the hundreds were driven together and burned. you saw wagons standing that would never be taken out again. more than a thousand guns had been broken up. on this 40 miles our treasures that can never be taken out began. we can only imagine what it took
for him to leave his family and home and drive across the ocean to america and then across the country, often through dangers and hostile territory in a wagon train. but he did. he overcame every single obstacle, but he was not finished. after a few years, he went back to his homeland and found a wife, augusta, and brought her, sailing around the horn. my aunt connie carlson is with us here this morning. this march, she will be 99. and connie, will you please stand up? [cheers and applause] do we have a light on here? [applause]
by the way, those who are hoping for my job, it may take awhile. so relax. [laughter] god willing, the genes are good. i will not say anymore. we can only imagine what it took for august shipment to leave his family -- no, that is what you get when you add li lib. here is the point. it is not just my family, but every californian is heir to some form a powerful tradition, some history of overcoming challenges much more daunting than the ones we face today. the native peoples who survived the the total transformation in their way of life to the most recent arrival, stories of courage abound. it is not over.
the people of california have not lost their pioneering spirit or their capacity to meet life's challenges. even in the midst of this recession, californians of this year will produce almost $2 trillion of new wealth as measured by our state domestic product. [applause] the innovations of silicon valley, the original thinking coming out of our colleges and universities, the skill of our farmers, the creative imagination of hollywood, the internet, and the grit and determination of small businesses everywhere all give hope to an even more abundant future of the head. [applause] and so do our teachers, our nurses, our firefighters, our police and correctional officers, our engineers, all matter public servant who
faithfully carry out our common undertaking. this is the time to honestly assess our financial condition and to make the tough choices. as we do, we will put our public accounts in order and investments in the private sector will accelerate and our economy will produce new jobs just as it has after each of the other 10 recessions since world war ii. we can be proud that our state leads the rest of the country in new forms of energy and energy efficiency. [applause] i set a goal of 20,000 megawatts of renewable energy by 2020. i intend to meet it. in the points i make and the actions they take, there are hundreds of new jobs to be created. if california regulatory
authorities make sensible and bold decisions. we want to make sure there are laws and rules focused on our most important objectives, minimizing delays and unnecessary cost. not only do leaders of energy companies, but executives from a broad range of california businesses and industries can work on common problems and the breakdowns we have seen. we will break the barriers that have been holding us back. we're living, after all -- [applause] we live after all in the eighth largest economy in the world. over the last decade, california has outpaced the nation in the growth of our domestic product and in our productivity per capita. that means each person working in this state is working more effectively in terms of what is produced in the country and in any other state. [applause]
aside from economic advance, i want to make sure we do everything that we can to ensure that our schools, our -- our schools are places of real learning. [applause] our budget problem is dire, but after years of cutbacks, i am determined to enhance our public schools so that our citizens of the future have the skills and character to keep california of and among the best. [applause] one of our native sons became for a time when of the most famous of american philosophers. he was born in 1855 in a mining camp that later became the town of grass valley. i mention him because of his philosophy of loyalty, exactly
what it is called for. loyalty to the community, larger than our individual need. we cannot overcome the sharp divisions that leave our politics and professional gridlock's but only if we reach into our hearts and mind that loyalty, that devotion to california above and beyond our narrow perspective. [applause] i also mentioned josiah because a long time my father spoke about him and his philosophy of loyalty. i did not grasp its importance. if but as i look back now, i understand how this loyalty to california was my bothers philosophy as well, to build our freeways, our universities, our public schools, and our state water plan. [applause]
in the coming year, we will grapple with problems of our schools and our prisons and water supply and the reliability on the environment, we will look in our system of pensions and how to ensure they are transparent and actuarially sound and fair. many of these issues have confronted california one way or another for decades. certainly since the time of gov. earl warren. it is enlightening to read through the and amrullah addresses a pass governors. i don't imagine too many do that. [laughter] they eat start these and are world dresses on a high note and focus on virtually the same recuring mission, education, crime, but it, water.
i have thought a lot about this, and it strikes me that we face together as californians not so much problems, but rather conditions. like inherits difficulties. a problem can be solved or forgotten, but a condition always remains. it elicits the best from each of us and shows how we depend on one another and how we have to work together. with realism, with confidence, with loyalty, and the deepest sense that california to forbearers and austerity, as the song says, "california, here i come, right back where i started from." faq, thank you.
i made a vow i'll be there were you want me, someway, somehow there ain't no mountain high enough, eight no valley low enough, a no river wide enough to keep me away from you. ♪ >> my love is alive down deep in my heart if you ever need a helping hand out be there as fast as i can there ain't no mountain high enough
he is expected to lay out his priorities as florida faces up $3.5 billion shortfall. we will have live coverage from tallahassee at noon eastern. later, all forum on the senate use of the filibuster. speakers include lamar alexander. live coverage from the heritage foundation begins at 2:00 eastern. the 112th congress cavils in wednesday with the swearing in the members, the election of a new house speaker, and a vote on new rules. watch live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on "washington journal," interviews with leaders and reporters and your calls. with the new congress battling in on wednesday, republicans are set to move ahead with trying to repeal a new health-care law. on friday, the house will hold over procedural vote on the
repeal. a final house vote will likely take place next wednesday. the senate is not expected to take out a hat -- take up the health-care repeal measure. now a panel of journalists on relations between the incoming 112th congress and president obama. this panel from the washington center for internship's an academic seminars is about 50 minutes. -- from the washington center for internships and academic seminars is about 50 minutes. >> will come back from your well-deserved break. if any of you are feeling cold,
we will try to do something with the temperature. what we are going to do now is the part from someone standing behind a lectern talking. we will have a more relaxed conversation along with a nice long table with three journalists. i extended the invitation to them not only because they are unusually appropriate for this occasion, but because they are friends of mine and very nice people. they are supremely knowledgeable about the areas of political life that they cover. gail chaddock is with the christian science monitor. for its size, enormously
influential. in fact, most of the big events in washington is that the godfrey sperling breakfast sponsored by the monitor, and every major political figure was to be a the speaker. gail is someone who knows congress very well and she and i talk about congress for a long time together. tony mauro is from the national law journal. i have known him for more years than i care to think about since he was a journalist and an undergraduate at rutgers when i first came there. he was on the staff of our campus newspaper. he is someone who for a non- lawyer is more knowledgeable about the supreme court than any lawyer i know. and finally, ken walsh, another
rutgers journalist who was the white house correspondent for u.s. news and world report, who travels around the world with presidents and sits in that small, stuffy place where correspondence pass the president's the president's spokesperson -- asked the president's spokesperson questions that will hopefully reveals something about what the president's plans are. we will ask them to sit down here and talk about what they think is going to be happening in the coming year. i am not going to restricted to the 112th congress. there will be a lot of news about what will happen in the supreme court. so support -- if the round of applause. gail, can, and tony.
and me. i have this lengthy list of questions for you guys. i will start out with the kind of general question. over the past 20 years, we've seen a lot of divided governments. a lot of comparisons are being drawn to 1995, to the great republican victory. do you see the same thing's happening this time as happened in 1994? or is this court -- is this going to be a completely unique experience? gail? >> what is interesting about this class is that they have the
historical background of the last one. when republicans took over the house in 1995 from the 1994 election, it was the first time republicans have been in power in more than 40 years. but there was not a republican in the congress that had any knowledge about what it was like to hold a gavel or to set an agenda. the whole notion was you somehow -- the only way to do something good was to come to terms with the people that did have the powers. and then came newt being rich and insurgents in congress. we will go after them relentlessly, using the media, on issues like corruption. they are not listening to you, they are out of touch, they are literally corrupt.
and they talked about things that might be laughable today, a book deal, trivial about some of the things -- with some of the things that happened subsequently. but there was a tremendous sense that the wind was at their pact. they're going to do dramatic things. their leader was on the front cover of newspapers, magazines, pushing his own leadership style and identity. the difference today is that these republicans, greater in number, understand that it is not permanent. the democrats swept back to power and then lost it very quickly. what is most on the minds of the republicans i talked to including some of the freshmen is that they are not seeing this as necessarily an historic shift of long duration.
that figure they only have a few months to make a strong case that the way they are covering is going to be different than the way the others did. so you have the speaker-elect, , no renamingr the streets, no tony bennett singing the songs, a modest inaugural. the major element of the boehner inaugural will be his 11 siblings, whose very presence, covering a different range of experience than most politicians families have, very modest family. that modesty, that sense of austerity, that sense of almost a non-personality -- i cannot promise you that he will not cry. [laughter] but i think that what you will see from him is a very much a
sense of stepping back. there are voices in my caucus. i want these voices to be heard. changing the rules of the house so that people have the chance to make amendments, the committees have a chance to function, it will not come off of the speaker's office, he said. if you will not come here just a vote. you're coming here to be legislators and i will help you do that. i will help all the voices participate. it will be a huge change from didn't change of the new era, which is i am the leader of this insurgency, i will read centralize power in the speaker's office. thankfully this freshman class would not put up with it, and john boehner knows it. >> people are talking about this official they will happen with the presidential state of the union in january, when a republican house voted to repeal his help insurance reform,
sitting in the audience while he delivers the state of the union. does this signal a kind of hostility that will prevail? or is there basis for agreement? >> from the white house perspective, how was in the white house during that period that gail talked about, when democrats lost control of the house in the senate, and president clinton then had to deal with the opposition party. just a moment on that. that was the era when clinton had to decide whether he was going to go back to what he campaigned as, which was as a centrist, as opposed to president obama, who did not necessarily campaign as a centrist, but left of center, a progressive as they call the. clinton went back to his roots, pulled to the left by the democratic leaders in congress over the first two years, then they lost control. clinton came up with this idea
based on the theories of his pollster, dick morris, of triangulation. he would borrow from the left and the right and come up with what he called a third way. that meant he was moving to the center. and it worked because he was able to counterbalance what the country felt was the excesses' of the republicans, and so he won the election solid. we have an interesting moment at the state of the union where we will have his opposition right behind him. i'm sure he will turn around and shake hands with boehner and make nice at the moment. but the question that we are resting in the white house, will that sense of accomplishment from the lame duck session where they did it quite a bit done -- you could argue about whether read matters and we could talk about that letter because i think the country's much more puppis on the results in
people's lives now rather than action in washington. people are distinguishing between legislation passed and what does it mean for me. so far people do not feel what the congress has done and what president obama has done it made a lot of difference in their lives. maybe they will change their mind. the question is -- through the spirit of accommodation from a lame duck session where you recall that this extension of the bush era tax cuts was passed, unemployment benefits pass, the senate ratified the start arms control treaty, the passage of the legislation to help the first responders after 9/11, which became a big issue -- will that continue? and without taking too much time, i think that is up in the air. you're getting a lot of noise in the system that republicans, pushed by the tea party, this
conservative movement around the country, a lot of republicans are nervous that if they do not stand up to obama and draw a contrast with him, as they are going to be challenged in primaries by the tea party and a lot of them are afraid of that. so they have this feeling among a lot of republicans, how far did they go to compromise, and if they go too far, does that mean they will be in trouble within their conservative world? so i think that is the big question -- as gail and ross are saying, a health care, the house wants to repeal it. they may have the votes to do that. but then you have the question of that funding health care, taking it on a piece by piece by not paying for it, and this piecemeal approach to it. i think that will be a real class. in the next few months. -- dow will be a real
splashpoint in the next few months. it will be a real test of accommodation, compromise, and the spirit of comity which everyone is talking about. i do not know that there will deliver on that. >> constitutional challenges to the health insurance reform. four judges have come down with opinions on that. challenges to the first sentence of the 14th amendment, the question of whether people born in the united states are citizens of the united states. a busy year in the court? >> is, although some of those issues make -- if his, although some of those issues take a while. -- it is, although some of those issues take a while. it will be an interesting dynamic between president obama and the congress where they are trying to may be repealed health care reform, but you will also
have their group of supreme court justices in the office who may hold the final say on health care reform, unless it is repealed. i think there is a bit of suspense as to how many justices will attend. you may recall last year's -- president obama kind of chewed out the supreme court, that justice is right in front of them, for the citizens united decision which repealed or overturned the part of the campaign finance laws for corporations and unions to make unlimited expenditures in campaigns. president obama criticize them -- and that justice is as is their custom did not react. the sit there because they're
not supposed to politically. but the democratic senator stood up and cheered obama and glared at that justices. it was kind of an awkward moment. several justices have since said they will not attend this year. because of that, they do not want to be seen as political pawns. there is this dynamic between both of these branches, the supreme court and the executive, and of course congress as well. ross wrote a book about the relationship between the supreme court and congress, which is a very useful texts. but anyway, i think there is a real danger for obama in this court challenges to the health care reform legislation. several judges have already said it is constitutional. one judge last month ruled the
individual mandate is unconstitutional. the part of law that says that all people must get some kind of health insurance. this judge said the powers of congress do not extend to forcing people to buy something. that is a real test of the power of congress. so how will come out, i am really not sure. i would guess that the health care -- the health reform legislation will be upheld in the end. the supreme court may not feel like it should overturn this massive piece of legislation and perhaps leave it to the elected branches. >> tony, there has been a presumption of constitutionality
of acts of congress. wouldn't it be glaring for them to actually find an act of congress unconstitutional? >> that is right. that is the tradition although it is a tradition that fades away when you get five votes to strike something down. it is happen fairly often. in fact, senator specter who is departing from congress voluntarily, he made a speech after speech about how the supreme court is dissing congress, is not deferential enough to congress and its enactments. i think he had a good point in the way -- in a way. congress enact something that is obviously, pat lay
unconstitutional, that is what the supreme court is there to do, to say you cannot do this. but then a gray areas, i think you are right. i think there should be a presumption of constitutionality. >> well, there are a couple of interesting explicit things. the whole question about the extension of the debt limit coming up. people wondering if it will happen early sometime in march. is this some kind of childish chicken game being played by people who want to use this as leverage to force down government spending? >> nothing childish about that issue. it is real and it is big and people have run on it, if they have committed to it, but it does sound like -- i don't know how many of you studied world war i history -- there is that glorious little war, it is going to be great, and did they
discover trench warfare, and how long did that go on, three years? it is actually not great once you are in the middle of it. but there are freshmen that are very eager -- if you have heard them on radio stations, television -- making comments about them. we want to see this through and we're not going to vote to raise the debt limit. i think part of the difficulty of the issue is a lot of people think that the way to not reached that debt limit is the way you do not richard debt limit. you just pop spending for awhile and then gradually things will even out. but most of the federal budget is not discretionary spending. it is things like interest on the national debt. interest rates go a little bit, and 14 trillion -- $14 trillion of debt mounts up rather quickly and bankers want to be paid.
that sense of what can actually be done between now and april is paying all of that debt limit, that question has not been asked yet. they are talking about it as if it was on matter of political will, and if only the polish democrats will agree to cuts, we would just be fine. -- a foolish democrats will agree to cuts, we would just be fine. it is a promise that there will be amendments on the floor. that has not happened in quite awhile. where you can see a real debate on the house of representatives and where a vote actually mean something. your board to see a whole series of very pointed discussions about what actually is a wasted dollars, where can we cut, what will happen when this country runs up against the debt ceiling? we had some nice examples in
europe. it is not pretty. greece is not a pretty picture right now. we're understanding what the consequences are. and what is -- what reasonably can be done between now and then to prevent it. a lot have told me that they think fox news will face them. that difference between 1994 and now is that people did not understand that it was really clinton possible. they think that this time, banks the fox news, which a lot of people listen to, people will understand that it is the democrats and president obama that are not willing to rein in their spending ways, and the republicans are standing up for righteousness. they think that this government shuts down, it will be short. it was reasonably short the last time once the republicans got
scared of the outcome. i started out saying that everyone remembers history. there is a sense in which we do not remember history all we remember it in a fresh way. and a fresh way of understanding this very important vote is one, it will be a splendid little war, too, we have a 500-pound gorilla on our side with fox news, and three, we can really stair that democrats down into making spending cuts they would not otherwise make over it this threat of a shutdown. but then the in, we know that it will not actually happened. the jig but in the end, we know it will not actually happened. >> there are things that the white house wanted to do and what like to do, and had obviously encountered obstacles. one is the environmental power project problems of greenhouse gas, which they do have a supreme court decision, that
2007 massachusetts' case. do you think they will push the regulatory bar of or will the republicans try to push back on that? >> that is a fundamental question we're asking our over the next two years. the president has in place an activist epa administrator, and a lot of people who want to do that, to use the epa regulatory power and the supreme court decision to push ahead, in effect circumventing congress and taking on greenhouse gases. i think obama is amenable to doing that, but one thing about obama is that to some extent, he is somewhat of a mystery as to how far he will go. not only on the epa issue and regulation, but just in confronting republicans and so on. but this idea of him using
regulation and the powers of the executive to get things done is something they are debating -- debating actively at the white house, because problems they feel they will have an cruppers. you may see a lot of that unilateral action from threats of obama, but the question and i have is how far he will go. a couple of people have pointed out the interesting dichotomy. he is a little rigid liberal pragmatist, not a liberal theologian. -- he is a liberal pragmatist, not all liberal theologian. he is not interested in running off a cliff in frustration and futility. he will say, if we think that half of what we want or whatever, let's do that and not just try to be too ideological about it. i happen to think that is right.
but how that is manifested is a big question we will have. i think we will see a lot of that on regulation. the more he does it with regulation, the more republicans will be furious that he is the find the will of the people as they see it and going around congress. that will really stir up the pot some, and obama is really not a confrontational guy. that is a big question for the next two years -- how much is he willing to confront the republican central the star clients? i was reminded of this -- he does not like confrontation, during his vacation in hawaii, a lot of people think of him as a chicago preacher. the arm-twisting, tough politics of chicago. but he was brought up in hawaii,
all whole different atmosphere, something called the aloha spirit, everyone needs to get along. he was deeply affected by this. he talks about it to his friends all the time. a lot of the people in the white house said that he is not the oil on vacation, he is going home and he is getting refreshed with all of the people living in the islands in the middle of the pacific and they have to get along because there is no other place for them to go. i think that is another part of obama we will be talking a lot about, the idea of him being a -- and accommodationist rather than a confrontationist. >> do you did the republicans see him as someone to be rolled? >> i think that they do. there is a big case for that because he did go along with the bush tax cuts for the wealthy. he did get some things in
return, but this feeling that there is a softness to obama, no irs find their comic that is another thing. -- no iron spine of there, that is another thing. he will have to stand up and say no a few times to be taken seriously in negotiations. >> after the lame duck, did some republicans feel like they had gotten snookered by obama? he gave up some but he got a lot. >> he did, but the feeling is they did get all the tax cuts, which was a big goal. on start, the arms control treaty, the entire foreign- policy establishment endorsed
it. i think you will find all lot of that lame-duck spirit fading very quickly as people start to think, 2012 is what we're focused on now, and like tony says, some people thought conservatives could have gotten more from obama. but you have gray lines and there is a sense that maybe he was too quick to compromise. >> i know a lot of liberals thought he was too quick to compromise. >> we use the phrase bold. the ideas, i say x, you say not x, and i give. he seemed the volunteers also security, cutting into the social security payroll tax. democrats would cut off an arm rather than yield an inch on
what they considered the most perfect piece of legislation the democrats ever produced. they do not want to begin cutting into the viability of social security, and the idea and not that the president was rolled but that he offered to do it bothers them. we needed term other than rolled. >> is true. there's that kind of sacred relic of the democratic party federated, and it is social security. whenever i come to the top of the federal laws on -- the topic of federalism, i see the eyes glaze over. yet here you have arizona and other states and challenging federal immigration policy by passing laws that clearly -- even the most flexible reading of the constitution is clearly the role of the federal government.
>> absolutely. we've been talking about the dynamic between the three federal branches of government. there is this other dynamic with the states. a lot of states are very impatient. they say that if congress would fake -- will not fix immigration, we are born to roll up our sleeves and do it ourselves. they have this legislation in arizona against hiring illegal aliens in a way that does not quite that the federal scheme. you also have it in global warming. another -- and number of states -- and number of liberal states have gone on to regulate climate change and industry, where congress has not yet acted. it is a constant issue before the supreme court. i know it does seem -- it is
hard to make it come alive, but it really is very important. and the supreme court has the really got a clear -- has not really got a clear position on it. it almost depends on what is the state going ahead and doing, and if we like that, it is ok, and if we do not, it is not ok. for example, doing little things like medical marijuana or the right to die, then all of this sudden, the justices who are in favor of state sovereignty, they suddenly find a reason to oppose it. they do not like what those particular states are doing. so shifting scenarios, it is hard to predict. >> let's bring the audience in on the stump. questions for our panelists.
>> i'm from san diego. he said it would take awhile for the supreme court to rule on the health care bill. [inaudible] >> that is a good question. the supreme court -- if you asked the justices that question, what he or she would say, they would say they do not pay attention to public opinion. that is not true. they live in a world of papers and mediua. i think public opinion will be a factor. an issue like that is so complex you can find reasons to say yes to uphold it and to turn
it down. so it is not like a clear black- and-white issue. how you choose one or the other. -- how do you choose one for another? if the public starts to like the health care reform and we're getting all these benefits, do not take them away, i think that would be the fact that the court would consider. they would not say it but they will. >> [inaudible] >> the new speaker and obama?
what you are hearing as a lot of talk about beohner is not as hard a case as a gingrinch. you're seeing a lot of coverage of that. he is not pulling all the attention to himself. he is more bohol speaker. if that is possible. -- he is more a humble speaker if that is possible. he is using a charm offensive with boehner and some of the others. that is an overstatement of what will happen, boehner is a golfer, so you will see obama ask him to play golf. he will invite people to camp david. >> he is a good golfer. >> that is a good distinction to make. he might not give him any shots. the contrast might not be too good with obama, but you'll see
him try to use the personal dimensions of the white house and his personality, which obama has not done a lot of, even with democrats. or the media, for that matter. i think you'll see much more of a personal relationship to smooth a lot of the rough, sharp edges. on the policy, i do not see that making much of a difference. in the and, they just go back to their beliefs and their caucuses and their politics. you might have all little bit more of a collegiality in public, but it is not generally realized that clinton and gingrih got along privately. they thought they knew something about everything. that sort of thing.
so in private they got along pretty well. in public it did not really come across that way. today there are some areas where they could agree. -- >> there are some areas where they could agree. i think education is one of those. i have been astonished first of all but the bush administration could put through -- could put through an education plan after campaigning to eliminate the democratic the department of education. it gave a strong role to the federal government. along comes president obama and he takes a superintended from the bush years and makes him education secretary. and then he proceeds with precisely the same set of assumptions, that accountability is good, that testing is good, that we need to hold the to the fire of schools that are not
performing, teachers not performers, of teachers' unions that are not performing. there could actually be an agreement between our republican congress and obama's education department on cracking down on the teachers' unions. an appalling thought, but it could actually happen. >> the incredible percentage of members of the national education association that attend democratic convergence. >> it is a huge part of the democratic base, unions and teachers' unions in particular. that the obama is even considering this -- >> yes. yes, you. >> he spoke recently on immigration.
-- you speak recently on immigration. what is your position on it being enforced? >> i do not know that i have a position because reporters are not supposed to have positions. [laughter] i think it is a dead letter now. it is not going to pass. i think it probably would be constitutional, but i honestly do not have a position on it. >> tony is not being evasive. reporters are different from columnist to write the opinion pieces. you deal in the way that gail and ken, you have to call them as you see him, and not inject your own opinion into the reporting that you do.
>> [unintelligible] how you think the midterm election will affect 2012? and over the next two years, will there be any surprises that come out of washington that will maybe change the face of the government? >> i guess i can start on that. i think the midterms will have more affect on the republicans than democrats. there's a lot of chatter in the democratic party about obama being renominated. i think the only real challenge
he will face for renomination is not from any place except anti- were liberals. what i'd get the sense is that there's no person who could carry the banner effectively and generate enough emotion in response to meet the challenge worthwhile, except in the anti- war left. a lot will depend on what happens in afghanistan this summer, the rate of withdrawal, what will happen in iraq, because a lot of people on the anti-war left are increasingly upset that obama is adopting bush policies, staying in iraq and afghanistan, and that would be the only place i could see a challenge. i do not think that will happen. so i do not think it is good to be that difference -- the midterms will not make that much difference for obama. he will be renominated and m1 and expects him to run again. on the republican side, it will have impact because you have
this tea party factor that we talked about earlier. a lot of the rest -- republican candidates are seen the power that he party has in some places and are worried about getting outflanked to their right. that is the concern. you can throw out a dozen names of who might run. the conventional wisdom is that within republican presidential politics, there are avenues that candidates run into debt to the nomination. there is the top of the latter, the entitlement candidate who may be ran before, it is that person's term, like a bob dole or ronald reagan, you have that common feeling in the party. the person whose turn it is. and then there's the fiscal conservative wing, the social conservative wing, and then a business-type outsider.
that may not make a difference this time. it may not be that way. but that is the way a lot of republicans think of it. you have these people take on these roles and get the nomination for those different ways. most of the way the entitlement candidate becomes the nominee. that may not happen this time. i think the republicans will run a candid that employ close attention to the tea party conservative resurgence in the party and i think they will be a big story for the next two years. >> i love your question. all elections in a way set up the next one, whether it is the next president being not the last one, that kind of pattern we have seen in the past. but interesting about this midterm, what happened with the state houses and the governors. suddenly you have tremendous republican gains in state houses and legislators, which
means it is a republican legislator that will decide how to redistrict. the census was a big boost to states that vote republican. but that is misleading because if you look within the states, they have big cities. the big cities often vote democratic. so who gets to carve it up? do you create your new district in districts that will help republicans, and do you carved up the state's wear blue states usually lose seats, do you take them away in a way that disadvantage is that democrats more than it helps republicans? those are political questions, but so much of what has happened in our elections has been the result of gerrymandered districts. you just look at them on a map and you know that no rational reason that the district should look like that. some of them are not even
contiguous anymore. as a result, typically those seats are not competitive at all. i would be astonished iraq against -- to run against a speech of richard strauss, a longtime publisher, he wrote for the monitor for 70 years, he wrote a column for "the new republican," any had to voices. for the monitor, his voice was very balanced, historical, looking back. for the magazine, it was very edgy. he wrote a speech in the mid- 1960s in which he said that the house had been so gerrymandered, it was not competitive anymore. in any given election, no more than half of the seats were competitive. half the seats? if it is 35 out of 435, we
think, very competitive election. look at how things of change. who gets to decide where the districts are? the fact that it is republican legislatures and republican governors in the year of the senses that his advantage republican states, that is a very big issue. is not as personal -- it is not as personal as some of the campaigns are. that is why i like the question. it will have a lot to do with politics in the next 10 years. >> we will take two more questions. >> [inaudible] this is for can wash. -- washington center for internships and academic seminars -- this question this forken walsh. [inaudible]
>> that is an interesting question. you have been following this in a very impressive way. some people think that obama is boring. like a say, i had interviewed him four times now, and you see this -- you hear this from a lot of his friends and people around him. obama is not a backslapping, storytelling sort of personable kind of guy in person. in the campaign, he seemed to be this tremendously charismatic figure. water -- but as people learn, in private he is very professorial. he is the guy who is very methodical and discipline. when you interview him, i would not say he is dull but he takes his time explaining things in a very careful way. he will come back at a question, and most presidents i had interviewed -- i have covered
five of them now -- do not come back to question. they move on. obama will say, you ask me something 10 minutes ago, i would like to explain myself further. and he will go on. you see this in his news conferences. the opening statements, the length of his answers. it frustrates white house reporters like me because he only cost 12 or 14 reporters in an hour because his answers are so long. a lot of people interpret that as dull or monotonous or whatever. then the filibuster's of senate. >> but i really think he is trying to explain himself. he is not trying to stall, he wants people to learn what he wants to say. when the president would get to 20 questions, so this is more apt than half of what we're used to. he says that -- the press corps thinks he is by getting to enough people.
but in policy terms, people wonder if obama is reaching out enough in a personal way to them. you hear this from people who talk to him, from associates and people who he wants to get something from. it is not what you say, how was your family or finding something to bond with the person with? he does not do that. and the last time i interviewed him, when i walked in, instead of asking about some common experiences, with every other president, in my experience he said, i have been thoroughly briefed, far away. that is -- fire away. that is the way he was. >> last question. right here in front.
>> how much influence do you think the tea party will have, and do you think that republicans can win with just directly the party candidates are someone who was more than a moderate? -- more like a moderate? >> as you have seen, there have been mixed results. sharron angle in about a coming you can be too extreme. you can lose as a tea party candidate. there is a lot of concern among republicans that they will be challenged. and just a challenge in a primary scarce a lot of them. i think there will be more of